Universal Access To All Knowledge
Home Donate | Store | Blog | FAQ | Jobs | Volunteer Positions | Contact | Bios | Forums | Projects | Terms, Privacy, & Copyright
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload

Reply to this post | See parent post | Go Back
View Post [edit]

Poster: hseamons Date: Nov 8, 2013 6:33pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dave's Picks # 8, impressions ?

I think it's just natural that because I have worked on identifying and removing unsyncliness so much when matrixing, I notice oscillation and phase issues pretty quickly and have developed a very low tolerance for them - and have learned how to eradicate them better. So, if others are noticing something "off," it's safe to say I will think things are probably a little "more off, more often." This is a developed sensitivity, I think, considering I thought some of the first matrixes I worked on were tight as hell - but little did I know that I had a lot more to learn, and it wasn't until after 70 matrixes that I found a more nuanced and controlled approach, technically speaking, to make things much nicer and more invigorating sonically. This slight change in how I did things was very subtle but made such a difference, at least for me, and I noticed it produced more refined and numerous edits. I am always chasing an ecstasy of sound and seeking an ecstatic experience while matrixing, and I try to communicate that experience in the end result. The ultimate goal then is a shared experience of ecstasy, which I find the most rewarding.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: micah6vs8 Date: Nov 8, 2013 7:16pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dave's Picks # 8, impressions ?

But, what did you think of DaP 8? Inquiring minds wanna know.

And if you please, what pops up (right away, no straining) as an example of an earlier matrix versus a later?

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: hseamons Date: Nov 8, 2013 7:22pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dave's Picks # 8, impressions ?

Not too keen on dissecting this very much, but since inquiring minds want to know - I think there is clearly a difference between sets 1 and 2 in terms of quality, with set 2 having more noticeable issues as far as syncing goes, which makes me really wonder about set 1. In the liner notes of the release, Paumgarten mentions that Wagner was in the back corner of the balcony before moving down center, and Wagner, I recall, has commented that the set 1 recording of his is just plain bad. Perhaps the distance of the set 1 recording made it less conflictual in terms of mixing, or perhaps it was mixed slightly lower because it sounded bad to remove certain issues, or perhaps it was an easier source to sync for whatever reason - it's really hard to say. But the real irony here is that the awesome, legendary set 2 recording is the one that is exhibiting some pretty serious oscillation and phasing issues when mixed with the board, from my point of view. I also think I was hearing faint clicks at parts where edits were made that were not smoothed over properly, although I could easily be wrong about the source of those click sounds. That being said, I think Jeffrey Norman is obviously a sonic genius and a real expert at what he does (Sunshine Daydream, anyone?), and he did a decent job for his first matrix - but for an official release I find the overall results highly unacceptable and somewhat psychologically disturbing. God bless David Lemieux and Jeffrey Norman for producing true works of art all these years - I look forward to all the treasures that lay ahead (I am a subscriber) - but as far as Dave's Picks Vol. 8 goes, they really missed the mark, or many marks as it were, on what could have been an especially good matrix to keep for the ages. Please forgive me if I sound overly critical of the work of the pros; I'm just giving an honest answer based on my experience.

Great second question, because the last matrix I did was a redo of HT Vol. 58 (8/6/82 St. Paul Civic Center) and for me demonstrates not only what happens when you use a Charlie Miller upgrade for a matrix, but what happens when I have a chance to improve on a matrix before the Vol. 71 revelation where I started making things better onward. Don't get me wrong, many of the pre-Volume 71 matrixes are close to spot-on, like Vol. 59 (9/28/75 Golden Gate Park), but I can tell I synced Vol. 58 better after a quick review of the older one. I also saw that I naturally made many more edits on the re-do when comparing it to the older project file (from '09!). Sometimes I've been shocked at some of the older ones' lack of edits when I look at the project file timelines, despite the basically good matrix sound. If there's any truth to "practice makes perfect" - and we know there is - it definitely applies to matrixing. For me, it's similar to working on a potter's wheel, wrestling, and surfing all at the same time - all to achieve sustained ecstasy. I want my matrixes to be nothing short of sustained ecstasy.

On a final note, it's always good to remember that matrixing will inevitably introduce sonic anomalies at times, and every matrix is its own beast to be tamed. There are usually going to be certain sonic issues - whether it's the audience chatter at times (which can often be entertaining), the slight haze on the vocals even if it's spot on for certain blends, or the distinctly higher high end for some mixes - that are nonetheless outweighed by the wonderful sonic enhancements of a properly produced matrix.

Reply to this post
Reply [edit]

Poster: light into ashes Date: Nov 8, 2013 9:25pm
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dave's Picks # 8, impressions ?

Thanks for the technician's point of view.
The set I AUD seemed to be mixed lower for sure...though even in set II, the AUD was set lower than most "fan" matrixers would do it - like Chappell's version - but that's OK with me. (Some of the audience chatter was still distractingly high in the mix for my taste.)
Part of what unsettles me about an "official" matrix is that I'm buying something that's essentially the same as a homemade fan project - only perhaps without as much care to detail. The moments when I could tell the vocal or guitar was slightly phased kind of pulled me out of the show.

Anyway, I thought it was amusing that in the booklet, nowhere does it acknowledge that this release is a matrix - no discussion of Norman's methods whatsoever.

Reply to this post
Reply

Poster: 970jbob@gmail.com Date: Nov 9, 2013 10:07am
Forum: GratefulDead Subject: Re: Dave's Picks # 8, impressions ?

Well like allot of first things in life, this may not be the best matrix possible, first time around, but it's still quite a solid mix.

Love the Lost Sailor > Saint of Circumstance. Seems like they start off on FIRE all through the show until drums> space when they get tired and the end of the 2 nd set is mellower, but finely played.